Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:27:02.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Between Zapata and Che

A Comparison of Social Movement Success and Failure in Mexico

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2016

Dolores Trevizo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This research explains why Mexico's 1968 student movement ended in the massacre of hundreds of students, while the peasant revolts that followed won land reform from the state. I argue that because Mexico's presidents managed each movement with both repression and concessions, other factors beyond the state's political opportunity structure explain these sharply contrasting social movement outcomes. The evidence strongly suggests that while Mexico's version of authoritarianism increased the odds of repression, each movement's levels of organization, disruption, and framing strategies determined the forms and degree of state violence. The analysis shows how politically salient frames may decrease the odds of repression or increase the odds of political alliances with state elites. It follows that political opportunities are more dynamic and dialogically emergent than previously theorized.

Type
Articles
Information
Social Science History , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , Summer 2006 , pp. 197 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © Social Science History Association 2006 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Almeida, Paul D. (2003) “Opportunity organizations and threat-induced contention: Protest waves in authoritarian settings.” American Journal of Sociology 109: 345–400.Google Scholar
Almeida, Paul D., and Stearns, Linda Brewster (1998) “Political opportunities and local grassroots environmental movements: The case of Minamata.” Social Problems 45: 37–60.Google Scholar
Amenta, Edwin, Carruthers, Bruce G., and Zylan, Yvonne (1992) “A hero for the aged? The Townsend movement, the political mediation model, and U.S. old-age policy, 1934–1950.” American Journal of Sociology 98: 308–39.Google Scholar
Andrews, Kenneth T. (2001) “Social movements and policy implementation: The Mississippi civil rights movement and the War on Poverty, 1965–1971.” American Sociological Review 66: 71–95.Google Scholar
Babb, Sarah (2001) Managing Mexico: Economists from Nationalism to Neoliberalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Banaszak, Lee Ann (1996) Why Movements Succeed or Fail: Opportunity, Culture, and the Struggle for Woman Suffrage. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bartra, Armando (1985) Los herederos de Zapata: Movimientos campesinos posrevolucionarios en México, 1920-1980. Mexico City: Ediciones Era.Google Scholar
Bartra, Roger (2002) Blood, Ink, and Culture: Miseries and Splendors of the Post-Mexican Condition. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Benford, Robert D., and Snow, David A. (2000) “Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment.” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 611–39.Google Scholar
Boudreau, Vincent (1996) “Northern theory, southern protest: Opportunity structure analysis in cross-national perspective.” Mobilization 1: 175–89.Google Scholar
Boudreaux, Richard (2003) “360 snipers shot at students in ‘68, Mexican inquiry finds.” Los Angeles Times, October 2.Google Scholar
Brockett, Charles D. (1991) “The structure of political opportunities and peasant mobilization in Central America.” Comparative Politics 23: 253–74.Google Scholar
Burstein, Paul (1999) “Social movements and public policy,” in Giugni, Marco, McAdam, Doug, and Tilly, Charles (eds.) How Social Movements Matter. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press: 3–21.Google Scholar
Canabal Cristiani, Beatriz (1984) Hoy luchamos por la tierra. Mexico City: Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana-Xochimilco.Google Scholar
Castañeda, Jorge G. (2000) Perpetuating Power: How Mexican Presidents Were Chosen. New York: New.Google Scholar
Cornelius, Wayne A. (1996) Mexican Politics in Transition: The Breakdown of a One-Party-Dominant Regime. San Diego: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of California at San Diego.Google Scholar
Cress, Daniel M., and Snow, David A. (2000) “The outcomes of homeless mobilization: The influence of organization, disruption, political mediation, and framing.” American Journal of Sociology 105: 1063–1104.Google Scholar
Diario oficial (1971–75) Mexico City.Google Scholar
Earl, Jennifer, Martin, Andrew, McCarthy, John D., and Soule, Sarah A. (2004) “The use of newspaper data in the study of collective action.” Annual Review of Sociology 30: 65–80.Google Scholar
El Día (1968) Mexico City. August 6.Google Scholar
Estados Unidos Mexicanos (1968) Cuarto informe que rinde al H. Congreso de la Unión el C. Presidente de la República Gustavo Díaz Ordaz 1o. de septiembre de 1968.Google Scholar
Excelsior (1970–75) Mexico City.Google Scholar
Foley, Michael W. (1991) “Agenda for mobilization: The agrarian question and popular mobilization in contemporary Mexico.” Latin American Research Review 26: 39–74.Google Scholar
Fox, Jonathan, and Gordillo, Gustavo (1989) “Between state and market: The campesinos' quest for autonomy,” in Cornelius, Wayne A., Gentleman, Judith, and Smith, Peter H. (eds.) Mexico's Alternative Political Futures. San Diego: Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of California at San Diego: 131–59.Google Scholar
Gamson, William (1990 [1975]) The Strategy of Social Protest. 2nd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.Google Scholar
Gilabert, Cesar (1993) El habito de la utopia: Analisis del imaginario sociopolitico en el movimiento estudiantil de Mexico, 1968. Mexico City: Instituto Mora, Miguel Angel Porrua.Google Scholar
Grindle, Merilee S. (1986) State and Countryside: Development Policy and Agrarian Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Guevara Niebla, Gilberto (1988) La democracia en la calle: Crónica del movimiento estudiantil mexicano. Mexico City: Siglo Veintiuno.Google Scholar
Guevara Niebla, Gilberto (1993) “Volver al 68.” Nexos 190: 31–43.Google Scholar
Hansen, Roger D. (1971) The Politics of Mexican Development. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Imaz Bayona, Cecilia (1975) “El apoyo popular al movimiento estudiantil de 1968.” Revista Mexicana de Sociología 37: 363–92.Google Scholar
Katz, Friedrich (1998) The Life and Times of Pancho Villa. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert P. (1986) “Political opportunity structures and political protest: Antinuclear movements in four democracies.” British Journal of Political Science 16: 57–85.Google Scholar
Knight, Alan (1986a) The Mexican Revolution. Vol. 1, Porfirians, Liberals and Peasants. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Knight, Alan (1986b) The Mexican Revolution. Vol. 2, Counter-revolution and Reconstruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Krain, Matthew (1997) “State-sponsored mass murder: The onset and severity of genocides and politicides.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 41: 331–60.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter, Koopmans, Ruud, Duyvendak, Jan Willem, and Giugni, Marco G. (1995) The Politics of New Social Movements in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Levy, Daniel C. (1980) University and Government in Mexico: Autonomy in an Authoritarian System. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Levy, Daniel C., and Székely, Gabriel (1987) Mexico: Paradoxes of Stability and Change. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Loaeza, Soledad (1993) “México, 1968: Los orígenes de la transición,” in Semo, Ilán (ed.) La transición interrumpida: México, 1968–1988. Mexico City: Nueva Imagen: 15–47.Google Scholar
Mabry, Donald J. (1982) The Mexican University and the State: Student Conflicts, 1910–1971. College Station: Texas A&M University Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, David S. (2004) “Protest and political opportunities.” Annual Review of Sociology 30: 125–45.Google Scholar
Middlebrook, Kevin J. (1995) The Paradox of Revolution: Labor, the State, and Authoritarianism in Mexico. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Kenneth Edward (2001) State-Society Relations in Mexico: Clientelism, Neoliberal State Reform, and the Case of Conasupo. Aldershot, U.K.: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Noonan, Rita K. (1995) “Women against the state: Political opportunities and collective action frames in Chile's transition to democracy.” Sociological Forum 10: 81–111.Google Scholar
Oliver, Pamela E., and Maney, Gregory M. (2000) “Political processes and local newspaper coverage of protest events: From selection bias to triadic interactions.” American Journal of Sociology 106: 463–505.Google Scholar
Oposición (1974) “Samuel Sánchez salió de prisión,” July 10.Google Scholar
Otero, Gerardo (2000) “Neoliberal reform in rural Mexico: Social structural and political dimensions.” Latin American Research Review 35: 187–207.Google Scholar
Paré Ouellet, Luisa (1992) “El estado y los campesinos,” in Alonso, J., Aziz, A., and Tamayo, J. (eds.) El nuevo estado mexicano. Vol. 3, Estado, actores sociales. Mexico City: Nueva Imagen: 125–43.Google Scholar
Pick, James B., Butler, Edgar W., and Lanzer, Elizabeth L. (1989) Atlas of Mexico. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Piven, Frances Fox, and Cloward, Richard A. (1977) Poor People's Movements: Why They Succeed, How They Fail. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Poniatowska, Elena (1977) La noche de Tlatelolco. Mexico City: Biblioteca Era.Google Scholar
Riding, Alan (1976) “Paper in Mexico ends liberal tone.” New York Times, July 10.Google Scholar
Riding, Alan (1986) Distant Neighbors: A Portrait of the Mexicans. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Rubin, Jeffrey W. (1997) Decentering the Regime: Ethnicity, Radicalism, and Democracy in Juchitán, Mexico. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Rummel, R. J. (1995) “Democracy, power, genocide, and mass murder.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 39: 3–26.Google Scholar
Sanderson, Steven E. (1986) The Transformation of Mexican Agriculture: International Structure and the Politics of Rural Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sanderson, Susan R. Walsh (1984) Land Reform in Mexico, 1910-1980. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Schmitter, Phillip (1974) “Still the century of corporatism.” Review of Politics 36: 85–131.Google Scholar
Schock, Kurt (1999) “People power and political opportunities: Social movement mobilization and outcomes in the Philippines and Burma.” Social Problems 46: 355–75.Google Scholar
Schryer, Frans J. (1990) Ethnicity and Class Conflict in Rural Mexico. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Snow, David A., and Benford, Robert D. (1988) “Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization.” International Social Movement Research 1: 197–218.Google Scholar
Stevens, Evelyn P. (1974) Protest and Response in Mexico. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tilly, Charles (1999) “From interactions to outcomes in social movements,” in Giugni, Marco, McAdam, Doug, and Tilly, Charles (eds.) How Social Movements Matter. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press: 253–70.Google Scholar
Trevizo, Dolores (2002) “Dispersed communist networks and grassroots leadership of peasant revolts in Mexico.” Sociological Perspectives 45: 285–315.Google Scholar
Trevizo, Dolores (2003) “Interclass conflict and political divisions among capitalists: The remaking of an agrarian capitalist class in Mexico, 1970–75.” Social Science History 27: 75–108.Google Scholar
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (1968a) Intelligence Information Cable 81569, distributed August 30, document 8 in “Mexico: The Tlatelolco massacre,” George Washington University, National Security Archive, Electronic Briefing Book, www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB10/nsaebb10.htm (accessed October 18, 2005).Google Scholar
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (1968b) Intelligence Information Cable 87410, distributed September 9, document 10 in “Mexico: The Tlatelolco massacre,” George Washington University, National Security Archive, Electronic Briefing Book, www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB10/nsaebb10.htm (accessed October 18, 2005).Google Scholar
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (1968c) “Mexican government in a quandary over student crisis,” Weekly Review, August 23, document 6 in “Mexico: The Tlatelolco massacre,” George Washington University, National Security Archive, Electronic Briefing Book, www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB10/nsaebb10.htm (accessed October 18, 2005).Google Scholar
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (1968d) “Violence grows in Mexican student crisis,” Weekly Review, September 27, document 15 in “Mexico: The Tlatelolco massacre,” George Washington University, National Security Archive, Electronic Briefing Book, www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB10/nsaebb10.htm (accessed October 18, 2005).Google Scholar
U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (1968) “Army participation in student situation, Mexico City,” Intelligence Information Report, October 18, document 23 in “Mexico: The Tlatelolco massacre,” George Washington University, National Security Archive, Electronic Briefing Book, www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB10/nsaebb10.htm (accessed October 18, 2005).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of State (1968) Telegram from the U.S. embassy in Mexico to the U.S. secretary of state, July 30, attachment to document 3 in “Mexico: The Tlatelolco massacre,” George Washington University, National Security Archive, Electronic Briefing Book, www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB10/nsaebb10.htm (accessed October 18, 2005).Google Scholar
Zermeño, Sergio (1978) Mexico: Una democracia utópica, el movimiento estudiantil del 68. Mexico City: Siglo Veintiuno.Google Scholar